data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ef118/ef118db8538316d13414b77917e324f00e093d44" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/838ef/838ef7ed972424e529461779d9c6cfea02d426cb" alt=""
When you literally don’t have the money to buy groceries or the time to prepare food, yep. Or the education to truly understand the impacts of eating that food all the time… This is why poor people in America are overweight.
When you literally don’t have the money to buy groceries or the time to prepare food, yep. Or the education to truly understand the impacts of eating that food all the time… This is why poor people in America are overweight.
OK so let’s start with Nature Metabolism because that’s the big one here. Nature is one of the number one scientific journals to get published in. They are so big they have a portfolio dedicated for different fields. This is one of them. This tells me you are not familiar with the field. Getting published in Nature alone is impressive and tells us this article did go through a rigorous peer review process.
Secondly, the effects mentioned in the news article align with similar research I am familiar with, and in science consensus is usually a good sign for the findings being valid.
I haven’t had time to look through the actual published article yet but I’m inclined to believe this. Regarding the sample size, yes it’s smallish, but you can’t judge it on its own. You have to look at the stats to see if it was sufficient or not. The larger the effect the smaller the sample size you need to show it. Liver fat went from like 1.5-2.5% which is a huge difference. I have definitely seen legitimate studies before with similar sample sizes.
Imma assign this weight heavier than the average study you come across, though less groundbreaking.
Source: neuroscience PhD student.
Separately, there is supposedly some evidence now that Alzheimer’s is caused by a virus, or by a history of viral infections.
You got a citation for that?
As a researcher in the field, this article doesn’t really give a good explanation of what’s going on here. Seems to say he just doubted the cause but didn’t provide any other ideas. Researchers right now are thinking the amyloid beta still plays a major part, the issue is free floating amyloid beta, not the plaques. The plaques therefore would just be another symptom of this free floating amyloid beta. Also, it’s surprisingly similar to diabetes, just localized in the brain. So don’t be overweight.
Well reading that first result, have you even read it? It said it may effect a rare subtype and could accelerate what we already know is happening. Not cause it.
Helps to actually read it ;)